Mumbai Court April 2000 Judgments
Maji Sainik Sahakari Grah Nirman Sanstha Maryadit Vs. Panditrao Krishn ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)BomCR33
ORDERVijay Daga, J. 1. The present petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 17th July 1986 passed by the Maharashtra State Co-operative Appellate Court, Bombay in Appeal No. 140 of 1984 filed by respondent No. 1 herein; whereby the Appellate Court allowed the said appeal and directed the respondents therein to hand over the possession of block in dispute to respondent No. 1 herein with further direction to respondent No. 2 to pay compensation to respondent No. 1 herein at the rate of Rs. 400/- per month from the date of dispossession till the delivery of possession and to pay Rs. 5,200/- to respondent No. 1 herein towards compensation subject to the adjustment of the amount recoverable by respondent No. 1 herein.2. The facts giving rise to this petition may be noted at the outset.The petitioner is the registered co-operative housing society having its office at Nehru Nagar, Vijapur Naka, Solapur. The respondent No. 1 Shri Panditrao Krishnaji Tanksale was the member and...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Manoj A.S. Dhargalkar Alias Kulkarni and Another Vs. Taramati Har ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)BomCR508; 2001(2)MhLj758
ORDERR.M.S. Khandeparkar, J. 1. Rule. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith. 2. This revision application arises from order dated 6-1-2000 passed in Civil Misc. Application No. 3/2000 in Regular Civil Suit No. 16/91 by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, at Pernem. By the impugned order the trial Court has dismissed the application dated 12-8-99 filed by the petitioners praying for a decree of the Court in favour of the petitioners on the ground that there was no need of any further trial in the suit as the issue of tenancy sought to be raised by the respondents has been finally decided against the respondents and that there is no other plea of defence raised by the respondents in the suit. 3. The undisputed facts relevant for the decision that the petitioners filed the suit against the respondents for the relief of permanent injunction to restrain the respondents and their agents from interfering in any manner in the suit property. The suit property comprises of property known as '...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Vithalrao and anr. Vs. Dixit and Apte Engineers and Constructio ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)ALLMR698; (2002)1BOMLR477; 2002(1)MhLj239
1. The two petitioners had filed a petition before the Rent Controller, Aurangabad, for possession of the suit premises against respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. The petition was filed on 5-1-1980. It was the contention of the petitioners that the petitioner No. 1, Ramesh, was of 16 years of age at the time of filing of the petition and he was under the guardianship of his mother, petitioner No. 2, Ushabai. The petitioners further contended that the respondent No. 1, M/s Dixit and Apte Engineers and Construction were tenant in the suit premises on monthly rent of Rs. 90/- with effect from 1-1-1959. However, later on, the firm was dissolved and, therefore, the tenancy in the name of the firm also came to an end. The petitioners demanded the possession of the suit premises from the respondent No. 2 Madhukar Apte. But he refused to give possession and allowed the family of Shri S. V. Apte, his brother, to occupy the suit premises and thus the respondent No. 3, wife of Shri S. V. Apte, by name, ...
Tag this Judgment!Bharat H. Mehta Vs. the Secretary, the Jai Hind Co-op. Housing Society ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Bom422; (2000)2BOMLR839; 2000(4)MhLj461
S.A. Bobde, J.1. This L.P.A. is against the order of the learned single Judge of this Court dated 11th April, 2000 dismissing the appellant's writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. By the writ petition he had challenged the order in appeal dated 3rd April, 2000 under Section 152A of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (for short the said Act) refusing to set aside the order of respondent No. 2 Returning Officer rejecting the appellant's nomination form on the ground that he is a defaulter in respect of the society's dues in terms brief, the appellant's contention in that he is not liable to be treated as a defaulter in respect of the dues of the society and is, therefore, entitled to contest the election to the Managing Committee due to be held on 24th April, 2000. The appellant says that he has discharged the entire liabilities of the society, that is, he has cleared all the dues amounting to Rs. 9774/- and this is apparent from his letter ...
Tag this Judgment!Quality Polly Closures Vs. the Executive Engineer, M.S.E.B. and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)ALLMR420; (2000)102BOMLR282
Vijay Daga, J.1. This revision application is directed against the order dated 17th September, 1997 passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Satara, on Exh. 47 in Special Civil Suit No. 172 of 1994 rejecting an application seeking amendment to the plaint.2. The facts giving rise to the present revision may be noticed as under:The plaintiff (applicant herein) has filed suit challenging the bill dated 6th April, 1994 for the electricity consumption charges amounting to Rs. 2,20.300/-. The plaintiff sought declaration that the said bill dated 6th April, 1994 demanding Rs. 2,20,300/- from the plaintiff was without any authority of law and was not binding on him.3. On being noticed, the defendants (respondents herein) appeared and filed its written statement contending therein that the bill also includes an amount of interest right from the year 1993. The above suit was posted for evidence from time to time. The plaintiff sought adjournments after adjournments. The Trial Court reco...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Matai Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-19-2000
Reported in: (2001)(96)LC783Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The appellant filed this appeal against the order-in-original dated 26.6.1992 passed by the Collector of Central Excise whereby the duty is demanded from M/s. Poonam Industries and penalty is also imposed under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules.2. Ld. Counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that a show cause notice dated 27.10.1986 was issued to M/s. Poonam Industries and to the appellant as legal heir of proprietor Mr. G.S. Matai. Ld.Counsel submits that the present show cause notice issued to M/s.Poonam Industries and to the legal heir, Mrs. G.S. Matai, is not sustainable as Sh. G.S. Matai, sole proprietor of M/s. Poonam Industries has expired on 7.5.1984. This fact that Sh. G.S. Matai expired on 7.5.1984, was duly conveyed to the revenue department. Ld.Counsel submits that as the proprietory concern ceased to exist after the death of sole proprietor, Sh. G.S. Matai on 7.5.1984, no show cause notice demanding duty can be served on the appellant as there is no pr...
Tag this Judgment!Azambhai Fakhirbhai Pansare Vs. Shri Gajanan Dharamshi Babar and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-19-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)ALLMR310; 2000(3)BomCR778; (2000)2BOMLR752
ORDERS.S. Nijjar, J.1. By way of this election petition, the petitioner seeks setting aside of the election of first respondent from Haveli Assembly Constituency, Dist. Pune being Maharashtra Assembly Constituency No. 245. For ready reference relevant portions of the pleadings in the petition may be noticed.2. In para 1 it is stated that elections were held on 11th September, 1999 and the result was declared on 7th October, 1999. In para 2 it is stated that the petitioner was nominated as a candidate of Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) having been allotted a symbol of 'Clock'. The respondent was a candidate of Shiv Sena Party having been allotted a symbol of 'Bow and Arrow'. The details about other candidates are irrelevant. In all there were seven candidates. Paragraph 3 sets out the total number of votes cast and the number of votes polled by each candidate. In para 4 it is stated that the first respondent has adopted, corrupt practice within the meaning of section 123(3) read with s...
Tag this Judgment!Graphic Charts Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-18-2000
Reported in: (2001)(94)LC762Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The issue for determination in these two appeals which arise out of two separate orders is the correct classification of instrumentation charts manufactured by the appellants herein. The as-sessees seek classification of the item under Chapter Sub-heading 4901.90, while the Revenue has upheld classification under Sub-heading 4823.90 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Appeal No. E/788/92-C arises out of the adjudication order passed by the Collector of Central Excises, Bombay by which he has confirmed the demand for differential duty for the period of six months--the period covered in the show cause notice is 1.7.1986 to 31.3.1991 while the demand has been restricted to a period of six months. Appeal No. E/988/92-C has been preferred against the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay who has upheld the order of the Assistant Collector classifying the item in dispute under Chapter Sub-heading 4823.90 read with Notification 135/89-CE dat...
Tag this Judgment!AshwIn Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-18-2000
Reported in: (2000)(120)ELT727Tri(Mum.)bai
1. These two appeals involve the common issue where the appellant is the same. These are, therefore, being disposed of by this common order.2. The appellants manufactured boxes for housing chokes for fluorescent tubes on job work basis. The names of the end-users were embossed on these boxes. In the impugned orders it was held that the mischief of Paragraph VIII of the Notification No. 175/86 would take away the eligibility of these inputs for concessional clearances under Notification No. 175/86. Hence, these appeals.3. We have perused substantial case laws. In the bulk of the judgments, the denial on this ground was upheld where the final goods with brand name were manufactured by a claimant assessee. Shri Naik has placed on record a number of judgments where in specific circumstances several component parts have been held as eligible for the benefit of this notification. The very same goods were so held eligible in the judgment reported in 1999 (112) E.L.T. 885 in the case of CCE v...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Samarth Samaj, a Registered Public Trust Under the Bombay Public ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-18-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)ALLMR550; 2000(3)BomCR640
ORDERR.J. Kochar, J.1.The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned Award dated 16-9-1993 passed by the 4th Labour Court, Thane holding that the action of terminating the services of the respondent-employee as illegal, null and void with effect from 5-12-1987. However, instead of granting reinstatement, as a normal rule, the Labour Court has moulded the relief and has awarded full back-wages from 5-12-1987 till December, 1992 at the rate of 800/- per month and a sum of Rs. 10,000/- in lieu of reinstatement. The respondent employee has not challenged this Award whereby he has been denied reinstatement, as a normal rule. The petitioner employer is aggrieved by the said Award and has filed the present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India.2. It appears from the record that the petitioner is a registered Public Trust under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 having a School viz. S.H. Jondhale Vidya Mandir. The respondent employee was employed by the petitioner from...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »